On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:37:09 +0100, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Brian {Hamilton Kelly} writes:

Nevertheless, they ARE the publishers of the libel ...

No. They are publishers if they control content. If they do not
control content, they are more like common carriers. The telephone
company is not responsible for crimes committed with its lines. Google
should not be responsible for libels carried out with its
servers--unless it is editing content, which apparently it is not.

That idea seems to be restricted to the US. The law in other
common-law jurisdictions is probably more similar to that of England,
according to which anyone who diseminates copies (or even one copy) of
the libel to third parties (or even one third party) is a publisher. A
provider which keeps a copy of the libel on its server and makes it
available to others on request undoubtedly qualifies. Whether this
*should* be the case is another question, but that is the way it is.

--
Don Aitken

Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being
read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com".